Posted on Aug 24, 2018
What is more important in any leader: integrity/character - OR - effectiveness?
6.5K
33
10
5
5
0
Responses: 9
And why can't you be both? Are you saying that they are mutually supporting? Gee- I found them to be so.
(3)
(0)
MAJ Bryan Zeski
Sure, they COULD be both. But they often are not. Given the choice, which would you rather be? Or follow?
(0)
(0)
Integrity/character is what will gain the most trust with your team and in the end make your team stronger. Doing whatever it takes to get the job done can lead you down the road of cutting regulation corners and get you in real trouble.
(1)
(0)
This Question brings to mind George Patton in WW2. Yes he was an effective leader. He also got the job done. His integrity and character got him in trouble. He slapped a soldier for being a coward because he had what we call now PSTD. The soldier was in a hospital. Patton asked him why he was there. He said " General I cant I cant fight anymore. Patton slapped him pulled out his Pistol I"ll shoot you, you worthless coward. Then he told the doctor to get this man out of here away from these Hero,s.
He lost his command over it. Thought he was never going to get another command. Eisenhower Let him stew for awhile, then used him to set up a Phony Army to fool Hitler to let him think they were coming ashore at Cherbourg on D Day. Once the landing was made at Normandy. Eisenhower gave him and army to command. He was very successful but was a pain in the A--. After the war in Nov. 45 A Drunken enlisted man coming back after a night on the town hit Pattons Jeep with a deuce and a half Truck. Patton was Paraylized from the neck down. He died several weeks later. Semper Fi.
He lost his command over it. Thought he was never going to get another command. Eisenhower Let him stew for awhile, then used him to set up a Phony Army to fool Hitler to let him think they were coming ashore at Cherbourg on D Day. Once the landing was made at Normandy. Eisenhower gave him and army to command. He was very successful but was a pain in the A--. After the war in Nov. 45 A Drunken enlisted man coming back after a night on the town hit Pattons Jeep with a deuce and a half Truck. Patton was Paraylized from the neck down. He died several weeks later. Semper Fi.
(0)
(0)
Odd question of separately measured descriptors. Any leader has to be effective. If not, they aren't leaders very long. Regarding the integrity/character thing, you'll likely see more effective leaders would be described that way. However, there are many past leaders who were substantial Alpha Hotels. Patton and to a lesser extent McArthur come to mind. The big thing was 99% of the troops never saw that side that was frequented on aides and command staff. I'd propose a variation of the topic of what types are allowed to be leaders today vs. the past. Most of the past leaders would fail. What, women in uniform??? What do you mean I can't kick his....? Effective for their time? You bet. Effective today? Debatable. However a Patton born in 1990 would be a different Patton. Maybe never put on a uniform.
My concern is my observation that people with integrity and character are not allowed to be fully effective leaders because of all the administrivia, policy, and social testbed issues that bog the military down. You see more "staff wonks" get promoted to leadership positions. So overall, I don't expect to see the kind of hell raising leaders of lore. I expect to see different leaders. Is that bad? Probably not a bad as I'm tempted to think as "effective" means you have to navigate the world to be that.
My concern is my observation that people with integrity and character are not allowed to be fully effective leaders because of all the administrivia, policy, and social testbed issues that bog the military down. You see more "staff wonks" get promoted to leadership positions. So overall, I don't expect to see the kind of hell raising leaders of lore. I expect to see different leaders. Is that bad? Probably not a bad as I'm tempted to think as "effective" means you have to navigate the world to be that.
(0)
(0)
I once heard someone say that if you had to choose between an effective leader who's an a**hole and "good guy" who is incompetent, chose the a**hole. Because every now and then he won't be an a**hole. Point being, if someone is incompetent, they'll always be incompetent. Now obviously character/integrity and effectiveness are not mutually exclusive. You can have both. But if I had to choose between the two, I'd rather have the integrity and character. Id' rather my leaders have that as well.
(0)
(0)
You really need to have a button that says "other" for a couple of reasons. I want both. If I can't have both than it really depends on the situation. Would you rather have Lee or Patton leading military forces? Clinton or Carter during peacetime? It seems that 18 years ago there were some that thought Integrity/Character mattered more than Effectiveness while other favored Effectiveness. Now, it seems the sides have switched.
(0)
(0)
There are many aspects to effectively leading others. Self-awareness may be the most important skill to build. Without understanding yourself, you can’t improve yourself. Self-awareness also helps you make decisions and makes you more comfortable and confident with each decision you make. Self-awareness allows you to understand your strengths and weaknesses so that you know where to focus your time and energy.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next


Leadership
Character
Values
